Promote Your Attorney Profile on Law.net - Get Found / Earn More!
Jason Headley Nails Communication Problems in Video
Jason Headley Nails Communication Problems in Video
Knowing What to Ask and When to Ask It
Knowing What to Ask and When to Ask It
Dykema Grabs Product Liability Superstar
Dykema Grabs Product Liability Superstar
Graduates of Iowa Law Schools May Not Have to Take Bar Exam
Graduates of Iowa Law Schools May Not Have to Take Bar Exam
Job Listings

Lionsgate Entertainment Wins Trademark Suit over the Movie ‘50/50’

On Thursday, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit ruled that the title of the movie ‘50/50’ created no confusion with the trademark of the rap duo Phifty-50.

The proprietor of Phifty-50, the Eastland Music Group, had sued Lionsgate Entertainment, which had produced the film depicting a young man’s battle with cancer. Eastland claimed a trademark for the phrase ‘50/50’ and sued.

The five-page opinion of the 7th Circuit upheld the earlier decision of the federal district court to dismiss the lawsuit. In his decision given earlier, U.S. District Judge George Lindberg had taken Rogers v. Grimaldi as the standard of review and held that the title of an artistic work can cause a trademark infringement only if it didn’t have any artistic significance or deliberately misled about the source of the work.

Lindsberg found that the title “50/50” had full artistic relevance to the plot of the film in reference to the chance of survival of the main character –a cancer patient.

What

 job title, keywords

Where

 city, state, zip



Get JD Journal in Your Mail
Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!


Writing for the appeals court Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook wrote the “complaint fails at the threshold: it does not allege that the use of ‘50/50’ as a title caused any confusion about the film’s source.”

The judge also commented that no moviegoer would think the jeweler Tiffany & Co was the source of the movie ‘Breakfast at Tiffany’s’ and no consumer would ordinarily think that the rap group was the source of the film.

The appeals court also cited at least eight other films with the phrase ‘50/50’ or a variant in its title and that if there were “any prospect of intellectual property in the phrase ‘50/50’” then the music company was a “a very junior user and in no position to complain.”

The case is Eastland Music Group v. Lionsgate Entertainment, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, No. 12-2928.

Lionsgate Entertainment Wins Trademark Suit over the Movie ‘50/50’ by

Tagged: , ,

Posted by on February 23, 2013. Filed under Home. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

 

 

Job of the Day
Executive Compensation Associate
USA-TX-Dallas

My client is an AmLaw 100 International law firm who is seeks a mid level Executive Compensation Associate to join the Dallas, Texas office.  To be considered you must have at least 3 years and n...